PDA

View Full Version : If Eric Gordon was not a RFA



Jeremy
06-23-2012, 10:45 AM
Would you offer him the max or close to that?

I would give him however much it takes to get him. I think he would be a good fit next to PG for the future and it would give us the opportunity to trade Granger for a high pick to possibly get Thomas Robinson.

DC
Gordon
George
Robinson
Hibbert

Ownagedood
06-23-2012, 10:48 AM
You don't offer an injury prone guy a max contract, but if your not set at SG you definitely make an offer.

Jeremy
06-23-2012, 10:49 AM
You don't offer an injury prone guy a max contract, but if your not set at SG you definitely make an offer.
I think the risk is small because he doesn't rely on athleticism to get his points or anything like that. I think his injury history is a fluke.

Will Galen
06-23-2012, 11:07 AM
Eric is a good player, however I don't think Eric is a max player when healthy.

Remember JO? His contract really killed us! The lesson; big contracts kill, so don't gamble on players who seem to be injury prone.

So because of his injury issues, if I was a GM in need of a 2 guard, I wouldn't risk anything more than two years at the mid level until Eric could prove himself healthy.

Eric turned down a huge contract before his last injury, so if I were Bird, and the way things stand at present, I wouldn't offer him anything.

Jeremy
06-23-2012, 11:19 AM
Eric is a good player, however I don't think Eric is a max player when healthy.

Remember JO? His contract really killed us! The lesson; big contracts kill, so don't gamble on players who seem to be injury prone.

So because of his injury issues, if I was a GM in need of a 2 guard, I wouldn't risk anything more than two years at the mid level until Eric could prove himself healthy.

Eric turned down a huge contract before his last injury, so if I were Bird, and the way things stand at present, I wouldn't offer him anything.
GMs don't do that though and Gordon definitely won't take the MLE let alone a 2 year contract. When the risk is as small as the risk is for Gordon then the best thing to do is to be quick and snatch him up. He probably at least wants a 5 or 4 year deal making at least 12m a year, and he is well worth that.

Ownagedood
06-23-2012, 11:24 AM
Being an IU fan I have watched and kept an eye on Eric Gordon for a while and have seen him go thru many injury issues in different parts of his body. I think that's a bad sign that he is a bit fragile.

He had a wrist injury the whole time at IU. Continues to deal with wrist issues as he took a hard foul that injured it in the NBA. Then came the big knee injury. He has played in 205 games since going pro out of 312 possible games his teams played in. Including only 9 last year. Im just not interested in paying him near the max.

xIndyFan
06-23-2012, 12:34 PM
first of all, i don't consider him a max player. good player, yes. but not a max guy.

one of the things i really like about the current pacer team is the size in SG, C and SF. I would like the team to keep those guys and add some size at PG and PF to that rather than get smaller.

croz24
06-23-2012, 12:53 PM
Oh the Removed... People seriously wouldn't even offer a 23yr old shooting guard can actually shoot and create his own shot?

Kind of reminds me how many on here were opposed to bringing in Rondo due to his lack of an outside jumper and him being on the trade block as a bad sign.

BringJackBack
06-23-2012, 12:55 PM
croz, I wouldn't call these people's opinions stupid, as it's your own narrow-mindedness that is causing you to think the way you are.

croz24
06-23-2012, 12:59 PM
croz, I wouldn't call these people's opinions stupid, as it's your own narrow-mindedness that is causing you to think the way you are.

These are likely the same people who still worship Danny Granger as the Pacers savior bound to bring us countless titles.

BringJackBack
06-23-2012, 01:06 PM
Actually, probably not.

OakMoses
06-23-2012, 01:22 PM
Refraining from offering Gordon a contract you know he won't accept is far from saying "I don't want him on my team." Any sensible person would want a healthy Eric Gordon on their team. There are very legitimate concerns which make it far from stupid to not want to be the team that's on the hook for his next, quite likely huge, contract.

Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk 2

ksuttonjr76
06-23-2012, 02:53 PM
Oh the Removed... People seriously wouldn't even offer a 23yr old shooting guard can actually shoot and create his own shot?

Kind of reminds me how many on here were opposed to bringing in Rondo due to his lack of an outside jumper and him being on the trade block as a bad sign.

It must have been a very small minority. My general opinion was that MOST of the forum was on board to take Rondo for DC and Hansbrough.

EDIT:
http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthread.php?70100-March-2012-NBA-trade-deadline-rumors

Feel free to read through the thread....

BobbyMac
06-23-2012, 03:09 PM
If Gordon was not a RFA he would still be likely to play < 50 games next year.

croz24
06-23-2012, 03:17 PM
It must have been a very small minority. My general opinion was that MOST of the forum was on board to take Rondo for DC and Hansbrough.

EDIT:
http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthread.php?70100-March-2012-NBA-trade-deadline-rumors

Feel free to read through the thread....

Exactly. DC and Hansbrough is a garbage package and MOST of the forum would not be willing to give up Granger for Rondo when Rondo is twice the player. We tend to overrate our own players far too often and let homerism get the best of us. Gordon is a guy who is from here and wants to be here. Talent wise, nobody on our roster can match what Gordon brings to the court, so the fact that people wouldn't even offer him a contract speaks volumes towards the basketball intelligence of some.

OlBlu
06-23-2012, 03:21 PM
Exactly. DC and Hansbrough is a garbage package and MOST of the forum would not be willing to give up Granger for Rondo when Rondo is twice the player. We tend to overrate our own players far too often and let homerism get the best of us. Gordon is a guy who is from here and wants to be here. Talent wise, nobody on our roster can match what Gordon brings to the court, so the fact that people wouldn't even offer him a contract speaks volumes towards the basketball intelligence of some.

Look again at the choices. The choices were to offer a max contract, a near max contract. max or close to it is too much or to make no offer at all. I wouldn't mind seeing him here but not for a max or near max contract with his injury history. bring him in for half that and I am on board. He has done nothing in the NBA and most people base this on his time at IU....:cool:

CableKC
06-23-2012, 03:42 PM
Back on topic.....I'd offer him $10-11 mil per year....not a Max contract offer....but something similar to what Monta Ellis got. EJ IMHO is in the same tier of Players that Players like Granger, Monta, Deng and Iggy got...a borderline All-star type player that may get the nod to play in the All-Star Game once or twice in his career that will be an above Average Starter but not a Franchise Level Player ( as in what Granger has become ). If the Hornets match...whatever.....his injuries are a concern...but that's the risk that a Team would take if they want a Player like him.

rm1369
06-23-2012, 03:58 PM
Many on here appear content to wait for a no-brainer superstar to land in the pacers lap for free. I doubt I've ever seen such a risk adverse fan base. It's no wonder the team's MO has appeared to be to just try to make the playoffs. I've seen some that wouldn't offer Deron Williams a max contract. Many wouldnt trade Granger for anything short of Lebron - and then they'd only do it if he took a pay cut. It's crazy. Maybe Gordon isn't the risk to take, but everyone is fooling themselves if they think this team will be more than a road bump to other teams title runs without taking a risk at some point.

Jeremy
06-23-2012, 04:08 PM
Many on here appear content to wait for a no-brainer superstar to land in the pacers lap for free. I doubt I've ever seen such a risk adverse fan base. It's no wonder the team's MO has appeared to be to just try to make the playoffs. I've seen some that wouldn't offer Deron Williams a max contract. Many wouldnt trade Granger for anything short of Lebron - and then they'd only do it if he took a pay cut. It's crazy. Maybe Gordon isn't the risk to take, but everyone is fooling themselves if they think this team will be more than a road bump to other teams title runs without taking a risk at some point.
And since when is Paul George showing superstar potential, right? He's just a lazy sit at the three point line Granger type player.

ksuttonjr76
06-23-2012, 04:32 PM
Many on here appear content to wait for a no-brainer superstar to land in the pacers lap for free. I doubt I've ever seen such a risk adverse fan base. It's no wonder the team's MO has appeared to be to just try to make the playoffs. I've seen some that wouldn't offer Deron Williams a max contract. Many wouldnt trade Granger for anything short of Lebron - and then they'd only do it if he took a pay cut. It's crazy. Maybe Gordon isn't the risk to take, but everyone is fooling themselves if they think this team will be more than a road bump to other teams title runs without taking a risk at some point.

Feel free to offer suggestions that...

1) Doesn't involve an injury-prone player (Gordon, Oden, Brandon Roy, etc.)
2) Doesn't involve going into salary cap hell (giving a max contract for the sake of giving one).
3) Doesn't involve gutting our team of 3-4 young pieces to get one "Superstar".
4) Doesn't involve tanking the season.
5) Doesn't involve "lateral" movements (Granger for Iggy, Collison for Holliday, etc).

ksuttonjr76
06-23-2012, 04:36 PM
And since when is Paul George showing superstar potential, right? He's just a lazy sit at the three point line Granger type player.

You must watching a different Pacers team. The Paul George I watched did a little bit more in a TEAM oriented offense than just camp on the 3PT land.

http://espn.go.com/nba/player/stats/_/id/4251/paul-george

Will Galen
06-23-2012, 04:37 PM
And since when is Paul George showing superstar potential, right? He's just a lazy sit at the three point line Granger type player.

Now you are trolling.

rm1369
06-23-2012, 04:53 PM
Feel free to offer suggestions that...

1) Doesn't involve an injury-prone player (Gordon, Oden, Brandon Roy, etc.)
2) Doesn't involve going into salary cap hell (giving a max contract for the sake of giving one).
3) Doesn't involve gutting our team of 3-4 young pieces to get one "Superstar".
4) Doesn't involve tanking the season.
5) Doesn't involve "lateral" movements (Granger for Iggy, Collison for Holliday, etc).

Basically, give you an option that doesn't involve risk. Lucky for many, I have no control, so I will sit here and watch the ultra conservative approach lead the pacers to "their title" - a playoff berth.

OlBlu
06-23-2012, 05:05 PM
Feel free to offer suggestions that...

1) Doesn't involve an injury-prone player (Gordon, Oden, Brandon Roy, etc.)
2) Doesn't involve going into salary cap hell (giving a max contract for the sake of giving one).
3) Doesn't involve gutting our team of 3-4 young pieces to get one "Superstar".
4) Doesn't involve tanking the season.
5) Doesn't involve "lateral" movements (Granger for Iggy, Collison for Holliday, etc).

If you get a chance to do #3, you should jump on it in a minute. You will not be a serious contender without a superstar. But, no worry, there is no team that would trade a "Superstar" for any three or four of any of the Pacers.......:cool:

ksuttonjr76
06-23-2012, 05:17 PM
Basically, give you an option that doesn't involve risk. Lucky for many, I have no control, so I will sit here and watch the ultra conservative approach lead the pacers to "their title" - a playoff berth.

Considering that this team is really 1-2 pieces from yearly contentions...why go overboard with the risks? ESPECIALLY if the risks prevents us from making OTHER moves to negate the problem if the risk goes bad.

rm1369
06-23-2012, 05:53 PM
Considering that this team is really 1-2 pieces from yearly contentions...why go overboard with the risks? ESPECIALLY if the risks prevents us from making OTHER moves to negate the problem if the risk goes bad.

Because the team isn't a role player away - its a star or two away. There is a major difference. Because this isn't a destination city the Pacers aren't going to get those players without risk. An injury risk, an attitude problem, overpaying a very good but not yet great player or trading for talented but unproven players or draft picks - these are the only way's this team will acquire the quality of player they need. Each of those involves a risk.

Kstat
06-23-2012, 05:56 PM
Feel free to offer suggestions that...

1) Doesn't involve an injury-prone player (Gordon, Oden, Brandon Roy, etc.)
2) Doesn't involve going into salary cap hell (giving a max contract for the sake of giving one).
3) Doesn't involve gutting our team of 3-4 young pieces to get one "Superstar".
4) Doesn't involve tanking the season.
5) Doesn't involve "lateral" movements (Granger for Iggy, Collison for Holliday, etc).

You just proved his point. If you want to acquire a quality player, there is always risk involved. The David west acquisition flies in the face of your first stipulation.

ballism
06-23-2012, 06:02 PM
He's max salary talent, and he would get max salary if he was unrestricted.
he might even get max salary anyway, as a restricted free agent.
you either offer the max, or there's little point to bother.

Kstat
06-23-2012, 06:08 PM
He would definitely not get max salary. At best, he'd get a 2-3 year deal at at max rate, which would allow him to prove himself as a long term investment.

ksuttonjr76
06-23-2012, 06:09 PM
You just proved his point. If you want to acquire a quality player, there is always risk involved. The David west acquisition flies in the face of your first stipulation.

The difference is David West still played a good majority of his games in any given season, and it's a 2-year contract at $10MIL/YR.

Eric Gordon has been playing less and less games per season, and people want give him MAX money over 4 years.

If David West didn't work out, Indiana was still in position to make other moves. If Eric Gordon doesn't work out...well, that's just JO 2.0.

ballism
06-23-2012, 06:24 PM
He would definitely not get max salary. At best, he'd get a 2-3 year deal at at max rate, which would allow him to prove himself as a long term investment.

i think you are wrong.
If Gordon was unrestricted, injuries or not, he'd be the highest profile young free agent on the market. And this is shaping up as a summer of very high demand and very low supply.

johndozark
06-23-2012, 08:24 PM
Until New Orleans succeeded in dumping their salary load to Washington, I figured we had a chance at a sign and trade for Gordon. There were three risks:

(1) It would probably take Granger and Collison/Hansbrough to get it done.

(2) It would depend on Gordon's being willing to take a reasonable less-than-max contract, a little less than Granger, in order to play at home and have teammates who can help him win.

(3) We would have to take the chance that the injury history is just bad luck, not injury-proneness. Possible, but...

I am a little iffy....If we are going to give up Granger, we need as close to a sure thing at a reasonable deal as we can get.

But we need to make some moves of some sort that advance us.

We were the fifth best team this year. If we stand pat, we will be lucky to be the eighth best next year. I don't see us with much more than a very lucky chance to get above third or fourth for several years, but we need to do everything we can to try.

My prioritized list is:

1. Point guard: Dragic in free agency

2. Top notch shot creator wing, possibly a back-up, who can also play some defense while he is in. Probably from trade, long shot of finding him in draft.

3. One or two back-up Big(s) upgrade probably at least one of these from draft.

Jeremy
06-24-2012, 09:22 AM
If we were to do a sign and trade from Gordon I would not mind giving them Granger and Lou Amundson.

Steagles
06-24-2012, 03:35 PM
I would not want to give Danny for EJ in a S&T. Danny is not injury prone and wants to be here. If Gordon wants to be here, he will communicate with the Pacers and sign a single year RFA deal and sign for a reasonable 8-10 or so million a year deal.

BlueNGold
06-24-2012, 03:40 PM
What is with the Eric Gordon threads? He's an often injured smallish SG whose best days are already behind him. I wouldn't offer him anything because I don't think he can stay on the court.